> Meanwhile the rest of the world has waited 50 years for this day.
50 years ago America got brought to its knees by a Middle East oil crisis. There was mass fuel rationing, nationwide laws passed for mileage and speed limits, and everyday citizens felt the pain acutely. In response, America developed a massive oil industry with cutting-edge technology and is now the largest oil producer in the world, by far. Now, 50 years later, America wages a war of revenge but they know they aren't going to feel the same pain they felt 50 years ago because of their strategic preparation.
Perhaps America isn't as dumb as you think. Perhaps it was the rest of the world that didn't make plans for the future?
A war of what?
Do you really believe that states wage war because of "revenge"?
> Perhaps America isn't as dumb as you think
No, they are dumber.
If this presidency was in Europe - or any other 1st world country - it would have been obliterated immediately and the party wiped out in the next elections.
Great, you can now help genocide defenseless children, and attack countries to cause massive disruptions to the rest of the world, without much worry. Sure great strategy to get HATED, as you should be.
Maybe, but destroying USAID was an unforgivable sin. Short of nukes, rapidly turning off direct medical and food aid that people in critical need have relied on for years is objectively one of the fastest way to kill millions of people.
Wamyos in SF are nearly indistinguishable from ubers/lyfts at this point. Maybe a bit slower if you don't have the highway mode enabled on your account, but they are everywhere and arrive within 5min most of the time I order one. I've ridden them so often I've lost count.
You'd have to pay me to ride in a Tesla robotaxi. That tech isn't anywhere near the same as Waymo.
Traffic lights can be tuned to create "green waves" that allows for efficient flow of traffic along arteries through a city. You can adjust the timing throughout the day to help alleviate congestion. In rural areas, heavy machinery/commercial vehicles may need to make a very wide turn through the intersection. Traffic circles are fine for a lot of applications but they aren't strictly better than lights in all circumstances.
I don't see how that could possibly be true. The same flow has to be achieved either way, and lights will always have some margin of inefficiency in switching. Seems lights will always be strictly worse than roundabouts in this sense.
There are also solutions for large vehicles where the center is raised but not impassible.
You over estimate the intelligence of the average American. I've lived in a few cities with a number of roundabouts and while I love them, the number of stupid people that panic and..
-stop in the roundabout
-stop before the roundabout and let their brain buffer for 30 seconds.
-somehow go the wrong way in the roundabout
-fail to yield to traffic in the roundabout
Is way too damn high. It makes traversing one a high stress situation since you have no idea if grandpa grunt and run in to you is about to perform a confusion based terror attack on the traffic control device.
Texas for example must have too much lead in the water because people seem to chronically get them wrong.
Indiana drivers seem to much better in general with a lower incident rate of "omg that guy almost hit me".
With this said roundabouts that service a fixed area, such as a neighborhood without much cross traffic seem fine in general. Whereas roundabouts in areas that pick up new traffic are far more prone to incidents. And god help you if the roundabout is in a tourist area.
One of the problems with roundabouts in the US is there are too few of them so you're always running into someone who has never dealt with one before which increases the risk of unexpected behavior.
Anecdotes are meaningless. I’ve driven in Texas where there were roundabouts and it wasn’t ever a problem.
Don’t forget that at a roundabout the risk of injury from unexpected behavior by other drivers is _lower_ than at a signalized intersection. There’s a good reason why the injury rate goes down wherever they are built.
As your net worth increases, the concern about what you have to lose from a personal safety perspective skyrockets. You start becoming far more paranoid and seeing crime everywhere. Tech CEOs and billionaires will build the dystopian panopticon society 100 times out of 100 because they don't care about other people, they just want to feel safe. If that means mass surveillance for the rest of the world, so be it.
If you don't believe me, just look at the CCP. It already happened there.
Being anti-crime doesn't mean lacking compassion. Crimes have victims, and reducing crime results in fewer of them. Poor people don't want to be victims any more than rich people do.
The US actually has a series of social safety nets. There are massive government programs like Medicaid, Medicare, and Social Security which provide real, measurable safety nets to the most vulnerable in society. There are also hundreds of thousands of charities, churches, and non-profit organizations that donate time, money, and resources to assist families going through hard times. There is also the US Military, which serves as a government-backed career path for millions of high-school graduates.
I think you're thinking that the US got ahead through exploiting labor. You missed the biggest piece of it though - the US welcomes (or at least until recently used to welcome) massive amounts of highly-educated immigrants from all over the world, and crucially has built a culture and society where those people can feel "American" fairly quickly in a way that they would never if they moved to Switzerland or France.
Being able to brain-drain the entire world and then smartly arm those people with unlimited capital to build their companies and dreams is the "unfair" American advantage. It isn't unethical, it's just not something European society supports. That, and the 30-year mortgage.
1) It's subsidised through cheap labor. The start-up whose founder live and work in buildings built by undocumented labor. Eat food grown by that labor, and served from food trucks run by undocumented labor. It's innovation subsidised by misery.
2) the brain-drain is unethical because it takes subsidised education of individuals without returning anything in return. Emmigrants should get a bill of the cost of their upbringing. It's really free-loading, especially for a country with such a poor public education system as the US.
50 years ago America got brought to its knees by a Middle East oil crisis. There was mass fuel rationing, nationwide laws passed for mileage and speed limits, and everyday citizens felt the pain acutely. In response, America developed a massive oil industry with cutting-edge technology and is now the largest oil producer in the world, by far. Now, 50 years later, America wages a war of revenge but they know they aren't going to feel the same pain they felt 50 years ago because of their strategic preparation.
Perhaps America isn't as dumb as you think. Perhaps it was the rest of the world that didn't make plans for the future?
reply